Post navigation

Science Fiction

It seems some commentators on AR have read a little science fiction if the comments on Ray Bradbury’s coda is anything to go by.

So what is it about SF (please don’t use the term SyFy, it’s too common) that people find interesting. Could it be something to do with the alternative definition of SF – Speculative Fiction.

Not every one who reads SF is a geek or nerd, the group normally expected to read science fiction books. When you take into account that SF can encompass utopian and dystopian fiction, apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction, and alternate history then it becomes a bit more understandable why normally sane people might read SF.

The Hitch-hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (original radio version, and books). I quite like a few funny bits in my fiction, and there are times when I identify with Arthur Dent – you try getting a decent cup of tea out of a machine.

I was listening to an interview by David Brin the other day for reason TV, and he was talking about things politically that made a lot of sense to me. I intend to read some of his books as soon as I can- as they sound interesting SF (and with a hard science background), and I don’t think I will get annoyed by political slants that I disagree with a la Iain Banks showing through. I loved all the “hard” SF as a child- Asimov, John Wyndham etc.

Where to start? Analog going back to the 50s, Galaxy from the 50s to its demise, Worlds of IF the same or do I count the 2000 actual SF books or the several hundred e-books – http://www.baen.com/library/ is a good place to start with those.

Or, maybe, I should just say I started reading SF in the 40s and have never stopped although I have to admit I find many of the new authors lack much of ‘spark’ that the older writers had. Also much of todays writing appears to be all ‘doom and gloom let’s all hide in a hole’ not the ‘let’s go out there and make a mark’ that it used to be.

Top of my list? Has to be John Wyndham – a cocktail of fifties style, thoughtful speculation and a large dash of wit and eloquence.

Add Heinlein – particularly ‘The Moon is a Harsh Mistress’ – and Harry Harrison for their quirky linguistic dexterity and Asimov for sheer all-round brilliance, and season with a selection of fifties ‘Golden Age’ classics and you have a recipe for happy reading.

Since SF lends itself to short fiction, there are inumerable small gems out there too. It’s a shame that the trash has become inextricably mixed up with works of literary excellence, as if someone lumped the classic romantic novels in with Mills & Boon.

Agree with Bill, plus all of Phillip K Dick, Poul Anderson and good timetravel stories too. I also enjoyed as a youngling Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Mars and Venus series too. John carter was a badly named but excellent film. Lousy marketing. I bet their team were not SF fans.

I used to be a sci-fi addict years ago, and Clifford D. Simak was my favourite writer – both in his novels and short stories. Isaac Asimov’s writing style left a lot to be desired, but his stories were good. I revisited some of John Wyndham’s novels recently – Chocky and The Midwych Cuckoos. Dated now – but very English.

Nice to see Wyndham appearing so often here. The best thing of Wyndham’s that I know is his collection of short stories called “The Seeds of Time”. This is excellent stuff: imagination and variety and excellent brain-food, all smartly written.

SF – when it’s done well – can combine true flights of fancy with incisive political and social commentary. Joe Haldeman’s ‘The Forever War’ is still a brilliant read, even though we’re way past the 1990s and yet to make first contact with the Taurans. Paul McAuley’s ‘The Quiet War’ is also astounding.

I read SF until my mid 20s and loved it. Then stopped, don’t know why. The only ones I’ve read over and over again were Frederic Brown’s short stories. I would still re-read hadn’t I moved one time too many and this time lost a box of books. You inspire me, though, to have a look whether I can find somewhere on the net a second-hand one

“Not every one who reads SF is a geek or nerd, the group normally expected to read science fiction books.

Can’t agree with this. Anyone can read science fiction and enjoy it (I just read Iain Banks’ Transition, more ideas per thousand words that ten years output of literary fiction although some might say it isn’t true science fiction) The geeks and nerds are those who read science fiction and delude themselves that it is non fiction.

My own taste in SF echo most of the above. I’ve got everything written by Heinlein. His genius lay in his ability to tell a great story and pack it full of “what ifs”. Best book? Hard to tell. “Starship Troopers”? I have almost everything of Philip K Dick’s. I love the humour in his books. Best book? Possibly “The man in the high castle”? I have almost everything by Larry Niven and his collaborators, great ideas and good science. I read ten or more Ian M Banks last year. Brilliant. But my favourite books are probably “The Stars my Destination” by Alfred Bester. 60 years old and still a great read. “Stand on Zanzibar” by John Brunner. Years ahead of its time. The only think he got wrong was the music. Both he and Aldous Huxley (in “Brave New World”) predicted that future music taste would include pieces in 9/8 or 13/4 time. The most popular music is still in 4/4, just as it always was. I love Kurt Vonnegut’s books and my favourite is the book he wrote as Kilgore Trout (usually a character in his books). “Venus on the half-shell”. Remember- the person who designed your mobile phone was probably inspired by Star Trek. The guys who designed Star Trek were inspired by Asimove, Heinlein and Arthur C Clark (who was the first person to work out the that if you placed a satellite in orbit at the correct distance from earth, it would appear stationery in the sky. He put it in a book published 15 years before the first rockets into space. We rely on geostationary satellites for everything from tv to satnav. The SF authors got there first. It’s a shame Hollywood and the BBC make such a hash of SF. The take out all the ideas and replace them with caricatures and bug eyed monsters. SF is more than that

For imagination (and stamina) Asimov’s ‘Foundation’ trilogy, ‘Foundation’, ‘Foundation and Empire’, and ‘Second Foundation’ ( other writings by him are sometimes included in the series) must surely be up there with the best.

It’s too easily forgotten that Star Trek TOS boasts a number of heavyweight SF authors amongst its contributors, with episodes written by, amongst others, Robert Bloch, Theodore Sturgeon, Richard Matheson (I Am Legend), Frederic Brown, Norman Spinrad and, of course, the greatest single episode of all time, ‘City on the Edge of Forever’, which was written by Harlan Ellison.

As for what I like, there’s little to argue with in any of the names already given in other comments but I would also put in a good word for Jim Blish, Robert Sheckley and Stanislaw Lem.

I have found well written Sci Fi a great reading companion over many years. I’m not a dyed in the wool SF reader, I frequently read many other genres but you could say SF was my first love, aged 10, if you include the Narnia books. That may be stretching the definition, but I soon ecncountered Asimov, A.C.Clarke and the other usual suspects.

What that kind of SF provides that no other genre has is searing visions of new technology, new ways of organising society, managing worlds, managing evolution, star systems and galaxies, how sentient beings relate to or survive extreme techonologies, and even, thanks to someone like Douglas Adams a good laugh.

I agree with others on this thread about the following excellent writers: Douglas Adams: without peer, can be relied on to bring out a smile and the occasional deep insight into humanity, life, the universe and, er, everything. Very sad he left this planet so early in his life. Asimov: Foundati0n trilogy, Robot series (I still think his laws of robotics are relevant today) Arthur C. Clarke: I think he is regarded by many as one of the best “hard sci fi ” writers. His stories are devoid of space-opera and over dramatic hyperbole but are full of fascinating, scientifically literate descriptions of many future worlds with gripping narratives. Most of his stuff is very readable and original, I recommend: Childhood’s End, Earthlight, A Fall of Moondust, Imperial Earth and 2010, Odysset Two. However Rendezvous with Rama and The Fountains of Paradise are especially brilliant. Brian Aldiss: Many of his 1960s and 1970s books are great, didn’t like Helliconia though. John Wyndham: Most Wyndham is very readable, especially Midwich Cuckoos, The Trouble with Lichen and, of course, Day of the Triffids. Larry Niven: Ringworld Robert Heinlein: Starship Troopers, Stranger in a Strange Land. David Brin: his Uplift novels Iain M. Banks: Consider Phelbas, his first Culture novel. His socialist utopianism can be annoying, hence why I have sympathy for his anti-Culture protagonist Phlebas. The Culture, by the way is a fascinating construct and Banks’ depiction of it is very captivating, from the Minds, and their strangely named ships to the Special Circumstances corps.

Avoid: Peter Hamilton, his enormously verbose space operas (approx 10 to 12 inches per trilogy, makes Lord of the Rings look like a Janet and John book) are spoilt by rather shallow, unpleasant characters. He has some good ideas and can spin a good yarn but the people in his books come straight out of badly written adult versions of Mills and Boon.